G-20 Agrees To Grow Global Economy By $2 Trillion, Has No Idea How To Actually Achieve It

Apparently all it takes to kick the world out of a secular recession and back into growth mode, is for several dozen finance ministers and central bankers to sit down and sign on the dotted line, agreeing it has to be done. That is the take home message from the just concluded latest G-20 meeting in Syndey, where said leaders agreed that it is time to finally grow the world economy by 2% over the next 5 years.

The final G-20 communiqué announced its member nations would take concrete action to increase investment and employment, among other reforms. "We will develop ambitious but realistic policies with the aim to lift our collective GDP by more than 2 percent above the trajectory implied by current policies over the coming 5 years," the G20 statement said.

Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey, who hosted the meeting, sold the plan as a new day for cooperation in the G20.

"We are putting a number to it for the first time -- putting a real number to what we are trying to achieve," Hockey told a news conference. "We want to add over $2 trillion more in economic activity and tens of millions of new jobs."

And to think all it took was several dozen of politicians sitting down for 2 days in balny Syndey and agreeing. So over five years after the start of the second great depression the G-20 has finally agreed and decided it is time to grow the economy: supposedly the reason there was no such growth previously is because the G-20 never willed it...

There is only one problem: the G-20 has absolutely no idea how to actually achieve its goal of boosting global output by more than the world's eighth largest economy Russia produces in a year. Nor does it have any measures to prod and punish any laggards from this most grand of central planning schemes. From Reuters:

There was no road map on how nations intend to get there or repercussions if they never arrive. The aim was to come up with the goal now, then have each country develop an action plan and a growth strategy for delivery at a November summit of G20 leaders in Brisbane.

"Each country will bring its own plan for economic growth," said Hockey. "Each country has to do the heavy lifting."

Agreeing on any goal is a step forward for the group that has failed in the past to agree on fiscal and current account targets. And it was a sea change from recent meetings where the debate was still on where their focus should lie: on growth or budget austerity.

So who is the mastermind behind this grand plan? Why the IMF of course: "The growth plan borrows wholesale from an IMF paper prepared for the Sydney meeting, which estimated that structural reforms would raise world economic output by about 0.5 percent per year over the next five years, boosting global output by $2.25 trillion."

The same IMF whose "forecasts" can best be summarized in the following chart (which will be revised lower shortly to account for all the snow in the Northeast US):

Aside from this idiocy, the other topic under boondoggle discussion was the fate of the taper, and specifically how emerging markets will (continue to) suffer should the Fed continue to withdraw liquidity. Here, once again, the developed nations won out, leaving the EMs, and particularly India's Raghuram Rajan - who has been pleading for far more coordination between central banks in a time of globla tightening - high and dry.

RBI'S RAJAN: POLICY TIGHTENING MUSTN'T UPSET GLOBAL ECONOMY

RAJAN SAYS INFLATION IS HURTING GROWTH

INDIA'S RAJAN SAYS BRINGING DOWN INFLATION BIGGEST CHALLENGE

RAJAN: DEVELOPED, EM NATIONS AGREE ON NEED TO CALIBRATE POLICY

What inflation? As for coordination, here is what the G-20 did agree on: whatever Yellen says, goes:

Financial markets had been wary of the possibility of friction between advanced and emerging economies, but nothing suggested the meeting would cause ripples on Monday. "The text of the communiqué indicates that the standard U.S. line that what is good for the core of the world economy is good for all seems to have won out," said Huw McKay, a senior economist at Westpac, noting there was nothing that could be taken as "inflammatory" about recent volatility in markets.

There was a nod to concerns by emerging nations that the Federal Reserve consider the impact of its policy tapering, which has led to bouts of capital flight from some of the more vulnerable markets.

"All our central banks maintain their commitment that monetary policy settings will continue to be carefully calibrated and clearly communicated, in the context of ongoing exchange of information and being mindful of impacts on the global economy," the communiqué read. There was never much expectation the Fed would consider actually slowing the pace of tapering, but its emerging peers had at least hoped for more cooperation on policy.

Hockey said there had been honest discussions among members on the impact of tapering and that newly installed Fed Chair Janet Yellen was "hugely impressive" when dealing with them.

Indeed, in the three weeks that Yellen has been Chairmanwoman, she has been truly hugely impressive. It's the next three years that may be more problematic.

You guys fell for it again. You think they're lying or incompetent but they're telling the God's honest truth.

Read the words again. "We will develop ambitious but realistic policies with the aim to lift our collective GDP by more than 2 percent above the trajectory implied by current policies over the coming 5 years," the G20 statement said.

OURS, as in theirs, as in TBTB's GDP, as in go fuck yourselves, serfs.

The Fed’s balance sheet for the week ended January 2, 2013, showed $2.9603 trillion in assets. A year later, the balance sheet for the week ended January 1, 2014, showed $4.0661 trillion in assets. So the Fed had added $1.106 trillion to its balance sheet during that year – $85.8 billion more than it had announced. It had in fact added on average $92.2 billion a month, not the bull-malarkey $85 billion that it kept telling the Wall-Street media circus. That's $7.2 billion a month more than announced.

And thus, the Fed’s monetization of the Federal debt exceeded the $883-billion deficit of calendar year 2013 not by 15.5% but by 25.2%!

Sure they will grow it by digitizing (ctrl-alt-print is so 19th century), $2 trillion in fiat monopoly money, as DEBT, the morons! These cupcakes called finance ministers need a lesson in sound money...not this keynesian BS...F'em!

That's because the fed also uses the interest it recieves from the assets it holds on its sheet and re-invests those dividends and recievables into repurchasing the assets. So yeah its 85Billion in printing and whatever is gained in income from those assets aswell.

The problem is the accumulation of debt/assets which are simply draining further and further resources into the hands of the wealthy who do not actually spend/consume the extra wealth. The further accumulation of interest/reserve capital by the wealthy is being used to bid up existing assets: causing stagnation, bubbles, mal-investment, and throttling demand/consumption. It's the classic end game of a the debt based fiat system. The fact is: the interest to pay the debts off has never existed -and mathematically cannot exist.

QE was/is a form of stealth restructuring aimed primarily at saving the wealthy from taking the full brunt of the rolling defaults of 2008/2009/etc.... Yet, the printing press can only do so much: the printed money used to buy up failed debt-assets at or near par by and large was simply used to bid up the same or similar debt-assets securities, bonds, real estate, equities, etc...

-The wealthy don't know what else to do but seek vig. -The wealthy generally simply aren't really creators of real wealth so much as loan-sharks and skimmers. It's easy to just buy .GOV debt and equities and clip coupons on the yacht/beach/roof-deck...

Everyone with a clue as to how the system is really organized and maintained understood well before the debt saturation/collapse of 2008/2009 that the burdensome and ultimately unsustainable debts must and will be diminished or restructured or written off one way or another somehow...

The Banksters/Oligarchy have apparently agreed to some amount of restructuring and/or debt relief now that the Governments/Central Banks have been forced to cover the worst of their lost bets/failed debt-assets.

Now, as to WHO is going to be bailed in/crammed down, when and how...???

Isn't this easily achieved with printing? Isn't that where most of our 'growth' has come from in the pat 7 years anyways...inflating currencies that drive YoY increases but which aren't really increases.....

Just "printing" (in the sense of producing relatively sterilized excess bank balance sheet reserves) doesn't deliver what they seek (other than propping up insolvent banks and thereby the status quo with a ~1% skim/kicker).

What they seek is probably be a 20% margin (un-sterilized and pure profit transfer) to those at the all-seeing eye atop the social pyramid.

Certain people know exactly how they intend to achieve this. The framework already exists as the foundations started being laid 15 years ago (and Afghanistan and Iraq were only the least profitable wars that President Shrub fought on an ROI basis). The IMF is actually a bit player in the larger BBCCI complex (Bureaucrat, Banker, Consultant, Commercial & Industrial complex). The plan involves more wealth transfer from the have-nots to the haves by increasing debt-burden on those who can least afford it, as well as a pre-packaged globalist regulatory capture and financial exploitation package (masked as wealth transfer from developed to emerging economies which is actually a public-purse-to-private-profit recycling scheme) which makes that ideologically biased piker John Perkins look like the 12th man on the deal team... Bend over and get ready for the BBC (Big Bankster Cock) ass-raping and balance sheet plundering of least at a generation.

The two critical obstacles to successful execution are keeping the sheeple in line while maintaining the status quo CB Ponzi scheme.

Yeah paying slave wages.These bunch of cunt flaps can't even hide the fact that their totally clueless.Like all those IOC official arseholes these IMF stooges are just on this gravy train peddaling misery

Bingo, from each according to his ability, to each according to his need! It's really quite simple! Marxism is alive and well here in the good ol USSA!!! Oboingo is seeing to it that he transforms Amerika all right...the rat bastard!

well, one way to get that growth would be to install a puppet regime in, let's say, Ukraine. you know the drill: get the central bank, debt thing going, strip away all the natural resources, manufacturing, wealth and industry, etc. and if that doesn't work out they can always turn it into the big world war they need to distract everyone from their criminal enterprise that has finally reached its inevitable demise.

Unicorns that conveniently piss watermelon flavor Arizona Iced Tea and shit skittles. For the rest of the purple drank recipe you have to use your SNAP/EBT/Obamacare subsidies at your government regulated pharmacy.

After reaching agreement on the actual growth of the global economy, leaders then split off into separate workshops to plan government spending of the increase in tax receipts. Many came out of the workshops, hosted by Goldman Sachs, impressed with the concept of packaging the future tax receipts into securitized products on Monday, and selling them to individual investors with guaranteed rates of return exceeding 10% annually. Lloyd Blankfein, Chairman, commented that the "securities" represent a terrific investment for retirement plans across the globe, even going so far as to suggest regulations that require specific allocations of the products in each investor's portfolio. "Now that we have that growth thing out of the way, it's about time that investors step up to the plate. For their own good of course." The products contain a 25% upfront load charge, with Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase the lead underwriters.

I have an idea. If we artificially jack up the prices of real estate and equities then the 99% will have to borrow more money and then we can increase the economy by $2 trillion, or any other trillion we desire! Can I have a Prize now?

Step 1. Give banksters $200 trillion dollars.Step 2. Surely that will be enough to ensure that at least $2 trillion will leak into the rest of the economy. Step 3. If not, then you might have to give the banksters some more money.Step 4. If all else fails, steal everyone's money and land. Then lend it back to them. But you might have to print some more money and lend that to them too.

Just print up 100T per month everybody. Then it'll cost 100$ for a loaf of bread but the GDP'd will grow wildly. Misiion accomplished. As for all these jobs created? Simple, in a lot of countries everyone will be working forthe government in the military like in North Korea where there is zero unemployment. Imagine that-we did it-eliminated unemployment. Now, to give all those military folks something to do..HMMMMM

If only they could jubilee the debt of governments and banks by shutting down the casino, bailing in the banksta wealth by imploding the Caymanista enclaves of Oligarchy, eviscerating it of all their scammed wealth in one fell stroke of transparency.

Then I would believe them !

Yakka Yakka Yakka at OK corral of thieves desperate to rustle the world.

food for thought: perhaps, all that $32 trillion of offshore wealth could be re-circulated to the peasants in the form of basic income payments, because it's the only means to keep the means of production in the hands of the owners and out of the hands of the workers.

A proposed agreement on automatic sharing of tax data between governments, released by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), promises to extend the data exchanges included in the US anti-tax-evasion law Fatca to all participating governments – but the full details of how the process will work will not be decided until later this year.

Previous efforts by the OECD, notably the Model Tax Convention, depended on voluntary information exchange. But the new OECD standard envisions the exchange happening automatically between signatory governments.

The proposal follows a series of deals on information exchange, including the many intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) put in place to implement the requirements of Fatca. And while the sample agreement envisions bilateral exchanges, the OECD is hoping that it will be taken up as the basis for a multilateral exchange of tax information – a plan which 86 nations, including all G-20 members, have already committed to in principle, it noted.

the solution must be to induce more debt as money and
at interest and attached to something essential and tangible,
or not, like the atmosphere, the water, carbon or information.
financialise the forests and essentials of the planet till
it screams in pain and starts fighting back.
could be that the g-20 leaders are committing suicide
by random planetary natural disaster and all for the vigorish?
probably stranger things have happened in the planet's long
and glorious past.

Steve Earle - Copperhead Roadhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvaEJzoaYZk&list=RDAINUPFbFpqg
.
fed - rock and roll -
copperhead road.
.
the fraud of debt induction as money
will continue until morale improves,
(or until the populations are entirely
stripped of their last shred of coherency
and then die off. then we will see
the master has no cloths, intelligence
or any other admirable qualities worth
a dime.)

Come on! We all know what they mean when they say they will "grow economy." They will print money and give it to banksters. As long as people accept fiat money as something that is valuable, the banksters do not need real economic growth. They can just print money.

lol...after reading that "heavily encrypted" policy statement of letting everyone sort it out for themselves and then get back to us for approval, while patting themselves on the back for issuing such a splendid policy statement, I can have no doubt of it ;-)

the DEATHSTAR... no doubt... will be paid for in BTC... [Then ~ we can all pat ourselves on the back and marvel at our technological mastery in the EXACT MOMENT that we press the button to blow ourselves up]...

Well, Canada did win the Hockey Gold today. Did you see the size of the "Gold medal"? the size of a grapefruit. Like everything else with the int'l community it is an illusion. They stopped giving out real gold medals 45 years ago. I don't think they can find enough real gold outside of China to make them anymore. The silver given to Sweden looked like tin foil. Party On you crazy diamond

I already know their plan: they will just confiscate $20 trillion from all the bank accounts on the planet, give it all to their buddies, and those people will be required to spend 10% of it (and keep the rest) to increase GDP by $2 trillion.

Language people, pay fucking attention to language like Carlin used to say.

We will develop ambitious but realistic policies with the aim to lift our collective GDP by more than 2 percent above the trajectory implied by current policies over the coming 5 years," the G20 statement said.

To each according to his contribution is a principle considered to be a defining feature of socialism by its advocates. It refers to an arrangement whereby individuals receive compensation based on the amount they contribute to the total output of society (also known as the "social product") in the form of effort, labor and productivity.

...

Apparently the next inverted twisting on this idea is individuals are collectives grouped by countries now who are not sovereign anymore in any form. They've iterated Marxism up one step from individuals in countries to individual countries in the global sphere.

...

There is only one problem: the G-20 has absolutely no idea how to actually achieve its goal of boosting global output by more than the world's eighth largest economy Russia produces in a year. Nor does it have any measures to prod and punish any laggards from this most grand of central planning schemes. From Reuters:

There was no road map on how nations intend to get there or repercussions if they never arrive. The aim was to come up with the goal now, then have each country develop an action plan and a growth strategy for delivery at a November summit of G20 leaders in Brisbane.

Yes there is, if you don't get with the program you get Greeced, Cyprused or Ukrained. Fuck you and your sovereignity and property rights as an individual country. They will back door illusion of choice each countries leadership till they get the right people in who are with the program. Just ask Italy..

And there is biggest threat to global freedom right out in the open now. Didn't we fight fucking cold war over just this sort of bullshit....

Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey, who hosted the meeting, sold the plan as a new day for cooperation in the G20.

And with that statement spells the death knell of freedom and liberty in the Western World and rings in the bell of global Marxism.

There ain't not fixing this problem with soft power any longer if they feel that confident. It won't matter when everything is backdoored to right the game to get the results they want using soft power. They co-opeted the whole structure by the slow mind poisoning of the idea of outsourcing....

A good militia is of such importance to a nation, that it is the chief part of the constitution of any free government. For though as to other things, the constitution be never so slight, a good militia will always preserve the public liberty. But in the best constitution that ever was, as to all other parts of government, if the militia be not upon a right foot, the liberty of that people must perish. The militia of ancient Rome, the best that ever was in any government, made her mistress of the world: but standing armies enslaved that great people, and their excellent militia and freedom perished together. The Lacedemonians continued eight hundred years free, and in great honour, because they had a good militia. The Swisses at this day are the freest, happiest, and the people of all Europe who can best defend themselves, because they have the best militia.

The minute this responsibility was outsourced the idea something that has been slowly been programmed at least as far back as the 60s under the guise of the civil rights and anti-war movements. This country was on a slow an inevitable path that is culminating now which the finally outsourcing blow being the miltia going from being mandatory aka a draft to voluntary and now that has been outsourced to mercenaries aka contractors in most cases who have no vested interest except for paycheck.

As Abraham Stanyan once said having a well regulated militia as opposed to a standing army of mercenary troops that may over turn a government at pleasure. Outsourcing created this culture of dependency and in turn freedom being dictated by a culture of mercenarism aka who is controlling the mercenaries.

Apparently you missed GW's post yesterday regarding Matt Stoller's work. It was extremely detailed and had direct congressional testimony from the principals reaching as far back as the 1960's. Throwing around -isms doesn't solve our ginormous economic problems, especially if you are not aware of why we are at this tragic place.

If you are one to believe that this is some Bolshevik, socialist grand plan, then you have been intellectually beaten. The Oligarchs have won and any noise you make is just whistling pass the graveyard.

Isms only are a means to an end. It is always about power and control. A small entity can always outlast a larger entity in the game of starvation. They feed on a lot of small entities enough stop giving consent the smaller, leaner and meaner need less to just survive the war of attrition the larger entities will starve or be forced to downsize first if enough smaller ones do. That is how you exercise hard power in a non-violent way by refusing to give consent through actions. Ghandi knew this. They are terrified of this because enough small people do they die first.

They fucked this country and world for that matter through slowly co-opting control by creating dependency and in turn a lack of self sufficiency through outsourcing. Little by little they got their tentacles into everything this way to the point they don't need to use hard power just squeeze the appropriate tentacle on the appropriate pressure point. The thing is in the process they've lost their ability to be self sufficient because they rely on us for survival through the control they exert. If they can't exert pressure by you refusing to give consent well the bigger entity always loses in the starvation game for resources while the smaller entities don't. Remember that little lesson about mice and mammals and dinosaurs. Morgan's cannon bitchez, freedom isn't being supersized...

let me know how that works out. i think you could accomplish that with a plan. first of all define sex, kissing should be enough. then you have to find a proper venue at which you might actually kiss each one of the cheerleaders, and all at one preplanned media event. so in the final outcome you have accomplished your goals, they look nothing like what some low brow readers of this website imagine, and you go on the talk show circuit and get filthy rich, after which you use your wealth to influence political and economic policy. you think you're kidding, but you're not

I sit underneath the freeway with an old friend from the old days
And a bottle of wine
Well he used to call me "Big Time", and he knew someday that I'd shine
Said he'd seen all the signs
He said . .

"Keep yourself to yourself
Keep your bedroll dry
boy you never can tell
What the shadows hide
Keep one eye on the ground
Pick up whatever you find
'Cause you've got no place to fall
When your back's to the wall"

He's gettin' old and it's showin' so I asked him how it's goin'
He said "I've seen better I guess
I've been rained on, I've been frozen, but this here's the life I've chosen
If it just wasn't for the loneliness"

Now this river suits me to a T. but if you're trying to raise a family
This ain't no place to be
There's a kid down by the dump there, ought to be in grade school somewhere
Now he hangs out with me
And I told him . . ."
chorus ....
Well we finished off the bottle and I told him,"Joe I think I ought to
Be headed uptown"
Well it was late, and I'd been drinkin', drivin' home I got to thinkin'
'Bout what's been going down
....
Cause they're nervous down on Wall Street, but they're trying to keep it upbeat
Or maybe they just don't care
But down at the river eyes are burnin', they feel the tables turnin'
So if you wind up down there . . .
chorus ....

i can help 1) redefine growth. and this isn't perverse as it seems. there is a lot of activity in the US economy which isn't covered by economic measures. a lot of people do charity work, volunteer work, help out a sick or elderly family member, and either loan or give money to the someone to help them, but none of that counts. not to mention the underemployed, underpaid working class. maybe the government has to pay these people a guaranteed living wage, a topic under discussion, based on merit. what have you done today? the old industrial age metrics are obsolete. 2) of course they can print more money, that's the knee jerk reaction. as Joyce referred to the American system, "Impovernment of the booble, by the bauble, and for the bubble.." {the impoverishing of the masses by government policy, using consumer goods, to create pockets of economic growth, and when the bubble burst they rush to restore it - what a sick system} the question might be why measure economic growth at all? its simply a statist tool. but we do need a currency, although perhaps all currency should be transactional only, since we are now to the place where electronic currency is feasible. no one would hold money, no one would hoard money, and money would be purely the best means of translating the value of different commodities. 3) for this we need global cooperation? is a part time caregiver in Bejing worth the same as their counterpart in New York? according to education and skills. answer that question and you are closer to the why and how of all this

A provocative and timely call for a moral approach to economics, drawing on philosophers, political theorists, writers, and economists from Aristotle to Marx to Keynes.

What constitutes the good life? What is the true value of money? Why do we work such long hours merely to acquire greater wealth? These are some of the questions that many asked themselves when the financial system crashed in 2008. This book tackles such questions head-on. The authors begin with the great economist John Maynard Keynes. In 1930 Keynes predicted that, within a century, per capita income would steadily rise, people’s basic needs would be met, and no one would have to work more than fifteen hours a week. Clearly, he was wrong: though income has increased as he envisioned, our wants have seemingly gone unsatisfied, and we continue to work long hours. The Skidelskys explain why Keynes was mistaken. Then, arguing from the premise that economics is a moral science, they trace the concept of the good life from Aristotle to the present and show how our lives over the last half century have strayed from that ideal. Finally, they issue a call to think anew about what really matters in our lives and how to attain it. How Much Is Enough? is that rarity, a work of deep intelligence and ethical commitment accessible to all readers. It will be lauded, debated, cited, and criticized. It will not be ignored.

How much is "enough"? Many years ago I asked myself the same question. How much do I need to earn before I have to stop bitching about being poor? I wrote a fantasy budget. My first attempt gave a figure of two grand per week. Years later I repeated the exercise and came up with a figure of twenty grand per week (It was actually ten grand but, being a fantasy budget, you just double the answer to cover taxes). No Ferraris were involved. But it did involve things like buying a normal house and paying it off in five years instead of lots of decades, and saving for a car over six months instead of five years. I have not repeated the exercise in the last couple of years. I think I'm too worried about what the new number might be.

1. Eliminate wars and hence destruction which costs money to reinstate what you had.

2. Eliminate wars and hence the pensions for those injured and widows pensions for their spouses.

3. Re-direct existing expenditures to other more productive areas which will either make money or save money. For example, build better mass transport systems which will require fewer cars and less fuel consumption.

4. Attach jail sentences to bankers and not just monetary damages to banks for proven illegal behaviour.

5. Reduce the number of politicians at every level of government. If these people have nothing better to do then they should at least not be paid for doing nothing and for the most part causing damage.

6. Reduce the amount that can be borrowed for college education because the growth in loans has only encouraged savage price increases in education and increased the number of useless courses. The resultant useless debt is a drag on the economy.

7. Get rid of the one dollar note and replace it with a coin.

8. Require any declaration of war by congress or the president to have the additional requirement that either one of their children or grandchildren be sent to the front line.

9. Stop deficit spending. If broke indivduals are not allowed to do it, why should broke governments be allowed to do it?

10. Introduce educational advertisements on TV as well as food packaging.

11. Encourage people to grow some of their own food.

12. Require the TBTF banks to shrink by a certain percentage each year until they are small enough to fail.

Regarding #5. I like that idea where we need many more congress reps so that they only represent something 60,000 citizens a piece. I think we would have something like 4,000 reps which would be too many to buy off (hopefully) and too many to coral by the party leadership. They might actually go back to representing the voters instead of the interests that pay for the lobbyists.

3. Redesign cities to minimize the need for transport. Who really wants to live an hour away from where they work? (Unless it is an industrial complex full of pollution). Be it car or train, who really wants to waste their lives sitting on one for one or two hours per day? Why wouldn't you want to just stumble out of bed and wander next door? Who really wants to travel ten kilometres just so they can buy a pair of jeans? How the fuck did we survive before cars were invented?

UN Agenda 21 has redesign of cities and everywhere else already centrally planned.... its called Smart Growth the creation of stack 'em and pack 'em cities which create a car-less lifestyle and a spy (smart) meter on every home in preparation for your calorie card

This is call sentiment and it is important in execution of a strategy. The problem is that not everyone is being sincere: We want this to happen, but we be damned if we can do much about it, besides let him with the largest oar row the boat, that would be Janet whaever-the- hell her name is. We do know how to do growth ourselves but we are enjoying the perks right now. Have a good day, if you can afford it. And see you next year - maybe sooner if Janet screws up.

The "spontaneous" generation of capital offset by debt resulting from the actions of the ECB and the Fed are simply stalling maneuvers because both the US and Europe are about to experience their http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsky_moment Minsky Moment

Thanks for mentioning the British banks. I just finished an article on the so called robust growth in the UK. How do you explain the pick up in growth to a mature country that has been struggling under debt? In general the UK economy is not particularly competitive, over-weighted in the service sector and global finance it is vulnerable to problems that surface throughout the world. As usual we must look deeper into the facts to get a clear picture of what is really happening.

It now appears much of the recent strength comes from the fact that thousands of Britons are receiving compensation for Payment Protection Insurance (PPI). Most Americans reading about the pickup in Britain's economy never even heard of the PPI. The total paid out so far, £13.3bn or about 22 billion American dollars has been a huge economic boost. This "fake economic boost" is painful for the banks, more on this below.

I agree that PPI compensation has had a lot to do with this fake UK GDP growth.

But there's also the rise in paper property prices engineered by George Osborne thru his "Funding For Lending" scheme and now his "Help To Buy" scheme. These have lead to what they always leads to: an increase in BTL investments and people pulling paper capital out of their homes and spending it on consumer goods.

None of this has anything to do with genuine economic growth. But that won't be apparent until after the 2015 general election when the bubble bursts (again).

I've noticed a change in the vocabulary in the various financial media outlets. The've taken to talking about consumption of digital media as opposed to watching, listening or reading. Not only have they changed the vocabulary but all the Patsies that are interviewed make what appears to be an uncomfortable effort in calling it consumption or the act of consuming.

We're going to see some incredible and utterly false GDP numbers in the near future, all based on watching TV.

"Destruction, theft and war combined with a new global vision of total control: that is our expertise. Don't bother us with antiquated ideas about peaceful production and commerce. Wealth? Let us be concerned about that -- it's all in the perception."

They want to add tens of millions of new jobs. They have trillions in plundered loot and can print more fiat, they have command of the military forces and police forces and tax agencies, they can issue any kind of regulations and controls and edicts that they like, and they can start wars and topple governments.